skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In the US at least, you must prove that the consumer was harmed in order to have a successful antitrust complaint, and that's going to be pretty hard with google. With microsoft, it was a pretty clear pattern, ie rebates to OEMs to thwart competition. And more recently, disallowing users to change their default browser. Instead, with google, you can bid/get ranked high and you're still able to compete. You can install chrome and change the default search engine easily, etc etc. Google has been pretty careful about avoiding mistakes Microsoft made. And at the end of the day, if you don't like google, you type in "bing.com" and lo and behold, you're using another search engine. You could not (at the time at least)just install a competing OS within seconds.
Twitter's link shortener (t.co) is down
from eastern washington.... how much was your ticket? also where did you find it?
i have one email me. contact info on page
Complete with arcane mutterings. I know that law has a lot of very specific terms, but is encoding them in Latin necessary?
Ask HN: Are Domain Names Worth Anything Anymore?
This is particularly useful to implement trees with materialized paths [1]. Since you can filter / order by those array fields, you can implement very efficient trees that do anything in one query, with all the benefits of relational algebra / DBMS. No need to resort to document stores to implement trees.

[1] http://justcramer.com/2012/04/08/using-arrays-as-materialize...
You surely understand that the description is a caricature of social media use. I am not saying, you or I have that experience but the point that I was making is that the majority of Facebook users, the teens and early 20s, as you're pointing, don't take any of this seriously. It's just one way of having fun until something else comes up. And that's why any competitor that enters this competition with a serious face i.e. we want to decentralize social interaction doesn't have a chance. The next Facebook killer will be something that's more FUN to use.
T.co DNS is down, all Twitter links broken
Twitter URL Shortener (t.co) Down (1:35 AM EST)
It could easily be argued that google is using their search monopoly to exclude less capitalized competitors from developing mobile operating systems by selling below cost, which harms consumers by reducing competition and choice.

Using open secrets data does not even begin to cover the ways in which a company can influence politics.
For those looking for secure tenant solutions:

EclipseLink ORM http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Examples/JPA/Multitenant

PostgreSQL Veil add-on: http://veil.projects.postgresql.org/curdocs/index.html

Multi-tenant Data and MySQL (trigger + view method): http://blog.empowercampaigns.com/post/1044240481/multi-tenan...

MSDN Multi-Tenant Data Architecture: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa479086.aspx
>Turing equivalence and not even turing equivalence but 2 pieces of code with roughly the same functionality does not dictate the speed between them. You seem to be under some sort of misconception that two pieces of code have to be implemented in the same

I am merely pointing out that there is overhead with every VM. This is especially true with every current JITted JavaScript in use today (more so than with the JVM and CLR). So how could it possibly be faster if both implementations use an equal amount of optimization otherwise.

How is this even ever an argument?
T.co DNS is down, all Twitter shortened links are broken
Minh ‘Gooseman’ Le’s Quest to Finish Tactical Intervention
Criticism is healthy when it comes to company life. If someone's baby is ugly, it doesn't matter.. You see, your kid is not a product or service (I HOPE!!!!).

Calling someone's baby ugly is not constructive criticism. What can a parent do? Give his kid plastic surgery? And even if they could, why would they. They don't have to profit from their kid. Only on a happiness way, which doesn't mean their kid has to look good to make them feel good.

So, if your company gets criticism, it might be healthy to listen to it. If it's based on nothing, let it slide. If it's well constructed, think about it and try to improve (if it falls under the direction you'd still want to go). If someone plainly says, your product or service is going to fail, he's either right, OR, you'll have someone to prove wrong. But just saying it's crap doesn't help you. Why do you think it's crap? Why do you think I will fail? Maybe they'll give you valid points that you completely overlooked. It might save you a lot of time, stress and money. But don't give up if you believe otherwise. PROVE THEM WRONG. RUB IT IN THEIR FACES!

Honesty is good, let people speak their minds. Listen. Laugh about it, or do something with it. Giving someone critisism doesn't mean they don't like your baby. They might just have a really good point..
The big problem I have with this kind of thing is the Grade 9 to Grade 12 age group. Violent video games are generally not meant for children, so why study their affects on children?

I understand that you want parents to be informed about their choices for their children, but unfortunately, this kind of study has a history of being (ab)used by groups trying to limit adult's access to this kind of video game, which I have a serious problem with.
If society needs those things it will find a way to pay for them. If it can't, it doesn't need them.

I don't accept your premise. The situation is too similar to a tragedy of the commons, with a large dose of ignorance mixed in: most people outside the creative industries have no idea how much hard work by how many different kinds of people ultimately contributes to that smash hit music recording or novel or computer game. They just think of it as the latest track from $singer or the latest book from $author/$publisher or the latest game from $studio.

Take a look at how long the credits are the next time you watch a blockbuster movie that you enjoy, and see how many of the job titles you even understand. Unless you work in the movies, it will probably be a small minority, yet without all the others you probably wouldn't have enjoyed the movie nearly so much, assuming it even existed.

The trouble is, a lot of people have got used to two conflicting views in recent years: we expect ever higher creative values in works (which come with a higher sunk cost to produce the work initially) and yet we see that we can redistribute them cheaply and quickly (which implies a marginal cost near zero). If you don't have copyright, or some other economic tool, to amortise the huge sunk cost over a similarly huge audience, then you can't afford to make the work in the first place and the fact that the marginal cost of physical reproduction/redistribution is now near zero doesn't help you.
Absolutely not. First, I have heard anecdotes about patents for (device and method for) transferring data over a network. Second, if you know about a patent you are now wilfully infringing and will get triple damages in court.

But don't worry, the patent trolls only want income, so they'll demand you license their patent at a price carefully calculated to be your revenue minus your costs.
or in fact, are names themselves worth anything?
I would argue this article only slightly missed it's mark: patents are not swords. Patents are nuclear weapons, and all parties in tech have been slowly amassing an arsenal of thousands of them. Some of these warheads are duds, but it still costs money to deflect the bomb away from you to determine that. Others have small tactical explosions. But there are some which are fusion bombs, some are the Tsar Bomba of patents.

You don't argue with a man with numerous atomic weapons, even if some of them might be duds. You fold to his demands. So large companies seek to shut down or absorb threats to their empires, preventing any new superpowers from rising through acquisitions and cross-licensing.

This leads to an interesting and
uneasy detente, roughly comparable to the posturing of countries during the cold war.

Between themselves, the superpowers have had to play a careful game of balance. They know that to actually sue would mean a series of counterattacks. Lobbing a single missile might mean that all silos will launch from the enemy camp. The cost of defending and waging multiple simultaneous lawsuits against multiple multi-billion lawsuits has meant that there is very much a state of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) present in the industry.

When Steve Jobs said that he was "willing to go thermonuclear on this" he wasn't being hyperbolic. Apple went from a Cold War to a hot war. Much like the real Cold War, Apple isn't directly attacking Google yet. They are having a war by proxy with Samsung and other Android device manufacturers first. But they are also snubbing Google in a variety of ways with iOS 6. Time will tell if Google and Apple will engage in a dazzling display that will embarrass my WarGames inspired copy of Defcon.

The only winning move is not to play at a society level, by reforming patents.
This is brand new, I saw it previewed on JLG Monday Note blog. The consumers are going to be incentivized to take them as a form of micropayment for access to articles behind a paywall...win-win for everybody I guess.
Twitter's mandatory link shortener, t.co, was down
I would say he doesn't know how to play the game. How you play the game is you never break the rules while you make sure people know you're not the bitch. As the person above you said, he should have made vague threats. This is negotiation 101. Government wants leverage, former employee wants leverage. They have what he wants ($), he has what they want (information).
I fail to see how this is appropriate content for Hacker News.
Sure, there is big overlap, because we all need both type of interaction.
Looks like a DNS failure, so adding 199.59.148.12 to your hosts file gives you working t.co links again.
Yeah, the touch-sensitive top of the Magic Mouse is its main selling point. But that's all ruined by, again, the sharp edges. You can't tell me not to press my palm and fingers onto the mouse :)
Diaspora 0.0.1.0 Released
555 timer was a milestone in my hacking endeavors. RIP Hans Camenzind.
Deploy entire web/db server with one line of code
> "In practice humans do not match automation."
Actually in practice human's almost always surpass automation mostly because they can start with automated output and improve upon it.
Thats a bit unfair, not everyone around the world understands the privacy implications, especially compared to a subsection of people on HN who've been awoken to this issue since the dawn of the net.

Yes that doesn't preclude people from being dense either - some people should and do know better as well.

I am saying that its a spectrum, and your point is valid for one chunk of that spectrum, but not its entirety.
The fundamental problem with social media sentiment analysis is that it is based upon the assumption that tweets are representative of the population. It ignores the issue that a large percentage of tweets come from spam bots.

As soon as you start measuring sentiment, there is an incentive for an interested party to try sway the results. For example, I could use a spam network to publish opinionated tweets just to obtain a headline in the media (E.g., "95% of tweets agreed with X"). The media coverage gives legitimacy to the manipulated result.

I wonder how many companies have set goals around this sort of sentiment. "Let's increase positive sentiment by 10%". An ethically challenged consultant could easily manipulate results to meet the stated goal.

There is still a place for sentiment analysis and that is in targeting individuals for follow-up. Assuming that the user can be matched to a real consumer, this avoids the issues of statistical manipulation. Though users can still exploit the "complain and get something free" loophole.
SupaDupa - Notting Hill, London

I'm a developer at SupaDupa, an online e-commerce platform aimed at boutiques and creatives, which can be found here: http://SupaDupa.me. You can find the job description here: http://supadupa.me/jobs

We're needing a strong all-rounder: a Ruby on Rails developer who is strong with Javascript and able to administrate a server. We're a small, passionate team committed to making something beautiful and making an impact, by allowing creatives to focus on doing what they love, with our platform allowing them to easily create a stunning shop, showcasing their work.

I've come to realise the importance on working on a project you're passionate about, with a team you trust, in a working environment you can excel in. I believe I've more than found that here and am confident you would to - check out the website and get in touch for a chat. You can contact me directly at james[@]supadupa.me.
Yes. They are still useful for SEO.

rentacar.com will get a free ranking boost on 'rent cars' that 'shertz.com' will not.
Nevermind that even with spam bots filtered out, twitter users are not nearly representative of the voting base.
Won't this lead to pay-walls adopting this and eventually creation of pay-per-view non-news sites? If so, people will blindly click thgough and quality of data won't match expectations.
Watch worldwide cyber-attacks live with HoneyMap
Funnily, with even minor tweaking of circumstance, we are all outliers or base normal.
Copyright isn't about incentivizing innovation.

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

-- United States Constitution
I think names are always worth something. How much they are worth depends on a variety of things.

Names frame a discussion of a product or service. It's the difference between calling something a) a cancer stick b) a cigarette or c ) a certain genus of plant, rolled into a cylinder so that it can be ignited from a chemically powered heat source.

In regards to domain names, domain names are inexpensive because people have realized that humans imagination is so great that we don't need productDescriptor.com anymore. We can use domain hacks, or come up with a different name. Often not having pizza.com available to us prompts better discussion of what our service truly offers, and results in a better product.

If domain names were worthless, than I'd direct everyone to simply type 192.168.1.1 (obviously local subnet) in their web-browsers to reach my site.
Tell HN: A craigslist scammer wants me to wire money
what should I do with a person who wants me to wire money through paypal?
picture below of the message.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B3NuGwdvvqX5TjdvNm9SdzFFa3c
Installing and maintaining a mail server. What OS doe you use? I'll bet there a whole host of dameons or services running and you never pay much attention to them. Someone else installed and configured them for you. And they just run all the time and you don't even pay attention to them.

What is an "mail server"? At its essence it's just a program that listens on a port for an incoming or outgoing message. Then you have programs for storing, delivering, forwarding, etc. And maybe you have perceived issues of being able to handle lots of messages. But you don't necessarily need all that if you are not providing email for other people. What if you're just a casual user who wants to send or receive a message to/from your friend? If I have an email daemon (or a "service" in Microsoft parlance) listening on a local port, I can type some text and "hit send" (or whatever method I choose to send the text to the daemon) and the mail is sent. No email provider needed. If the recipient has her email daemon listening for messages from my IP address (and only my IP address), she gets the message "immediately". There is no third party email provider. This is how email works.

There is also no spam if we do it that way. Her daemon is not open to the whole internet. It's only open to me. Why is this so baffling?

Neither third party email providers nor some rule that "no one wants to run an email server" or "no one should run their own email server" are a part of the email protocol. Those are your observations of what people have done so far and your opinions. They do not set limits on what can and cannot be done. Are we in the business of startups and trying new things or are we here to preserve status quo?

Email is internet messaging, one of the oldest forms of it. Email is a message sent in a specified format* over the internet. What could be more simple?

*Granted the format is rather rigid, but it's not too difficult for anyone to learn. It's like writing a business letter.

Millions of people have an interest in sending messages to each other over the internet. And millions of people have no interest in sending bulk email for commercial purposes. That's all I need to know. A project is born.

There is a need for an "email replacement" as many others have voiced and as pg identified in his list, but I'm afraid it's not going to come from anti-spam zealots. I appreciate what they try to do, but I do not appreciate their mindless, blunt-force methods and ideas about "good guys" and "bad guys".

There is an enormous amount of bulk email sent every minute of everyday. Just because it is "opt-out" doesn't make it any less impersonal and unwanted (or any less of a huge drain on the world's computing resources). Can we accept that some people have little interest in receiving bulk email, and that there may be a market (besides you) for email inboxes that are not open to marketers, but only to known contacts? Alas, that's not what the anti-spam zealots aim to address. They do not want to curb bulk email. They just want to stop certain senders.

This does not really move me toward my vision of email. It's just the same old thing. An inbox full of garbage.
its no longer work
I'm not thinking of flattery at all. I'm thinking of people too polite to say what they really think, and so what they do say is useless. He goes on and on about how hard it is to be critical and kind at the same time, the truth is, most people will just take the shortcut and just be kind. They are cutting things out and inserting meaningless pleasantries, not adding false compliments to get something.
I'm sure someone is having an interesting conversation right now. Twitter needs to stop having these embarrassing down-ages if they want to be a permanent player in the tech field.
On List Comprehension in C++
Gephi, an open source graph visualization and manipulation software
I saw this Kickstarter elsewhere, and I'm frankly amazed they've gotten as much funding as they have.

There aren't that many embarrassingly parallel problems that aren't I/O limited that need to be performed on a consistent basis. If I needed a cluster, then I'd go rent one from Amazon for an hour or four.
M'eh. If everyone likes your language it's probably terrible.

When I finally took a look at TypeScript I was amazed at how inoffensive it is. It's nothing but an improvement. It might not be the best improvement imaginable, but JS in its entirety is still there. How do you get upset about this?
Yes, Inconsolata has been very popular of late.

http://www.hanselman.com/blog/InSearchOfThePerfectMonospaced...

Inconsolata-dz which is bigger (by pure serendipity) than Inconsolata and Inconsolata-g. Also highly recommended.

http://nodnod.net/2009/feb/12/adding-straight-single-and-dou...

BTW, Inconsolata-g is derived from Inconsolata-dz and, IMO some of the mods were done purely based on the/for the author's whims and fancies. So, when you use it, typographically it jars (a lot). YMMV .
luke=like
I see you neglected to read the rest of my post and didn't consider any of the possible implications of said party. A party unwittingly attended can cost many opportunities. Employment, friends, standing with family, and the party was only one example of many other potential problems. Look up the "girls around me" app. It's entirely feasible for a stalker to make use of information in these ways, and that's one of the more pleasant possibilities.

Friends can inadvertently reveal private data about other friends due to a mistaken sense of security by both parties. I don't understand how anyone can deny that this is a serious problem.
As pointed out, there are a lot of subsections within the whole.

Skinner and Pavlov quantified pretty important systems and heuristics your grey matter works on, and are directly responsible for the underlying systems being applied in Zynga - heck - ALL video games.

Take a lot of psych as trying to figure out which underlying subsytems are active when people make decisions.

Even Freud's understanding that most of human calculation occurs in the subconscious was a fundamental jump forward for humanity - and IMO, it put a stop to the belief of rationalty which underpinned a good part of the enlightenment. (bit hard to encourage people to be rational when their wet ware isn't capable of handling it.)

Yes at the same time it can be very handwavy - and some of their best measurements are of dynamic systems in flux.
> Why is free-riding bad unless it reduces the incentive for innovation?

Free-riding is a narrower concept than simply reduced incentives. There are lots of different incentives and lots of different ways to increase or reduce incentives, but free-riding addresses the specific case of where the ability to copy a design cheaply and easily and thus undercut the inventor reduces or eliminates the incentive to invest in new designs.

> I don't think anyone is suggesting that Microsoft would be able to survive with the same business model in the absence of copyright. But the real question is, would there still be operating systems? And obviously there would be -- at the very least BSD and GNU/Linux and the like.

That's not really the full extent of the question. It's not just whether there would be operating systems, but would the market be served as well by those operating systems?

BSD was a university research project that arose in the context of a major DARPA project. That's a viable and popular model, but do we want to rely on the Department of Defense for an even larger fraction of our technology? I used to work for a DARPA contractor. They're not the world's most efficient way to develop technology. We use DARPA for blue-sky things the market doesn't invest in naturally, not because it's a great way to develop new technology.

Linux started as a personal hobby, and the incentive structure has always relied heavily on people scratching their own itches. Would either have served the home computer user market like Windows did? An incentive scheme that relies on government funding or personal hobbies results in very different software than one where a customer can pay a vendor for a piece of software. And I think there is much to be said about how the latter incentive model incentivizes the creation of software that the public wants rather than say what is most useful to the military.

It's interesting to see how recent developments built on Linux have been monetized. Nobody can make money selling Linux directly to cell phone vendors, like Microsoft did selling Windows to PC vendors, so what you have instead is a platform, Android, based entirely on the perpetuation of Google's search/advertising empire. Instead of paying cash for an OS, people pay in the form of their privacy, because that's something that can be monetized in a world where software cannot be monetized. Is that better?
Mobile auction house and guild chat ;) Not everything in WoW is about raiding, although 90% of the reason I play is to raid..
Thankfully the Internet has a pretty short term memory.
And nothing of value... /snark
I'd also like to second the point regard the advertising of apps. Advertising your own app to me in a pop-up is pretty much the death-knell for my usage of any site.